VIDEO: Matt Walsh exposes media lies about NYC terror attack

First, let me apologize for not  posting "'Allahu akbar!' at Gracie Mansion" on Sunday. TBH, when I first saw the story on BBC, it didn't seem like a big deal. Just a couple of Pennsylvania teenagers playing around with homemade bombs and claiming to be jihadis -- servants of the Prophet!

Here's the BBC summary, ICYMI. Two men have been charged with terror offences after police said they attempted to bomb a protest outside the New York City mayor's home in an attack allegedly inspired by the Islamic State group. 

The suspects, 18-year-old Emir Balat and 19-year-old Ibrahim Kayumi, allegedly told police that they aimed for the Saturday attack to be "even larger" than the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing that left three dead. New York police say the pair attempted to detonate two explosives outside Gracie Mansion, where Mayor Zohran Mamdani lives. 

Authorities found a third bomb in their car. The incident happened during an anti-Islam protest. None of the explosives went off as intended. So... no biggie. Nobody hurt. Just a couple of Muslim kids from Pennsylvania horsing around. As you can see, they're now in the custody of law enforcement. Kid Balat is on the left, Kid Bayumi the right. 

No reason for alarm, eh, let alone Islamophobia. But...my Spidey senses got aroused when I saw how hard the lickspittle media -- notably the New York Times and CNN -- were trying to conceal information about the suspects' backgrounds and motivation. Here's the NYT's sanitized version of the story:

"Two Pennsylvania teenagers crossed into New York City Saturday morning for what could’ve been a normal day enjoying the city during abnormally warm weather. But in less than an hour, their lives would drastically change as the pair would be arrested for throwing homemade bombs."

Enough to gag a maggot, isn't it? They don't say that Emir Balat, 18, and Ibrahim Kayumi, 19, are legally adults. NYC police described the items they hurled not as "homemade bombs" but as "IEDs". These they tossed into a crowd of innocent people peacefully protesting against the Islamization of New York City. 

Also omitted from the Times' version were reports that Mr Balat yelled "Allahu akbar!" during the incident. Nor did they write that during a brief appearance before reporters, he flashed the single-finger gesture associated with ISIS. Even Islamist-Communist New York mayor Zohran Mamdani has grudgingly admitted the two men are charged with a "heinous act of terrorism and proclaiming their allegiance to ISIS."

Bad as the Times report was, American right-wing political commentator and podcast host Matt Walsh says CBS was worse and CNN worse still. Here's what he has to say about the mainstream media's deliberate obfuscation and egregious mendacity.

And here's the straight dope, as published belatedly by CBS News under the subhead "Investigators looking into suspects' background"

"Investigators are looking into the overseas travel for Balat and Kayumi. Balat left the U.S. for several months and traveled to Istanbul from May 6 to Aug. 26, 2025. He most recently traveled back to the US from Turkey in January of this year. Meanwhile, Kayumi traveled to Istanbul for several weeks in July and August 2024 and to Saudi Arabia in late March of that year. 

"Federal investigators have also been interviewing family members of Balat and Kayumi as part of their investigation, as well as looking at their online communications. Balat's parents were born in Turkey and were naturalized as US citizens in 2017. Balat is a US citizen and has been living with his family in a large two-story home in Pennsylvania. 

"A woman at the residence confirmed to CBS Philadelphia that Balat lived at the house. Kayumi's parents are originally from Afghanistan. They became naturalized US citizens in 2004 and 2009. It is unclear if Kayumi was living with them at the time of the incident Saturday."

If you're searching for the truth about the threat of Islamic terrorism -- coming soon to a locale not far enough from your home! -- don't listen to CNN, the NYT, Wapo, NPR and the other lickspittle media. Listen to Matt Walsh and the other commentators we feature here on WWW! We're pullin' for ya!

UPDATED: Encore une fois: "Allahu akbar" à Paris

Just when Parisians thought it was safe to go out again -- in downtown Paris, if not in the suburban no-go zones -- another Muslim madman went on a rampage in the classy 2e Arrondissement on Saturday, knifing at least five innocent civilians, one of whom has died. For reasons of political correctness, the flics (= cops, for American readers) confirmed that there had been a knife attack in the city without giving any details.

A spokesthingy for the Paris prefecture told the meeja "A person attacked five people in the second district of Paris. Police intervened immediately. The individual [attacker] died. Another person, seriously injured (by the attacker) died from their injuries." The suspect has yet to be identified, he said, and the motive for the attack remains unclear.

That's the official story as of 2300, Paris time. Why, then, am I saying the attacker was a Muslim madman? I could have said "Islamic extremist". Makes no difference. European authorities don't like to use any of those words until after the dust has settled and the blood has been cleaned off the streets. Mustn't say anything that would engender Islamophobia, you know! (The fact that the Islamist jihadis are out to kill us, one by one, doesn't matter.) I will bet you that when the details leak out, my characterization of the attacker will prove to be correct. Lifetime pct .976.

UPDATE ADDED 13/5/18: Sure enough. As details of yesterday's attack leak out, witnesses reported hearing the man shouting "Allahu akbar!" The phrase is Arabic for "God is great!", and has become a battle cry for Islamic terrorist jihadis. And sure enough, ISIS claimed the attacker was one of its fighters. Lifetime pct .978.

Although ISIS provided no evidence or details about his identity, French police filled in the blanks. According to an official who asked to remain anonymous for fear of being punished for political incorrectness, the assailant was born in the largely Muslim Russian republic of Chechnya, and had for years been on police radar for "radicalism". According to the same source, Islamic extremists behind multiple attacks in France in recent years were also on radical watch lists.

So... French police and "security watchdogs" know who these Muslim madmen are and where they are, but are unable to do anything to stop them from bringing the jihad against us "infidels" into the hearts of our cities. I say, if we can't deport them all (because they are legion), could we not at least stop letting more of them into our countries? Just askin'.

FOOTNOTE ADDED 13/8/18: For those who can't quite place Chechnya, it's in the deep south of Russia, wedged in between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea, just northeast of Georgia. Nooo... the other Georgia! Militant Islamists have been fighting for decades to break the tiny semi-autonomous republic away from Russia.

Some "refugees" from the fighting have settled in France, but others have come to the USA. The Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzokhar Tsarnaev, entered the United States with their father on tourist visas, and immediately claimed political asylum. Whether they were asylum-seekers or "refugees" doesn't really make any difference to the victims of their horrendous attack.

Diversity does NOT make us strong, sez Ann Coulter

I don't know about you, dear reader, but I am sick, sore and tired of having pro-diversity propaganda shoved down my throat by the lamestream media 24/7. Fifty years ago the aim of all progressive and right-thinking people was "integration". It didn't take long for people to realize that "integration" lasts from the moment the first black family moves into the neighbourhood until the last white family moves out. So, in much the same way as "global warming" morphed into "climate change", yesterday's push for integration became today's shove towards "diversity", the more the better. Because diversity makes us strong. Right? Well, I call BS on that!

"Diversity is a strength" is a big black crock of bullshit, a Big Lie of which Joseph Goebbels would be proud. That's not just my opinion, but that of Ann Coulter, expressed very forcefully in Adios America! (Regnery Publishing, 2015), which I am just now getting around to reading. [My keyboard won't make the upside-down !. Ed.] Here, by way of my strong recommendation, is an excerpt.

The companion lie to the "America is a nation of immigrants" lie is "diversity is a strength." Praising diversity is simply part of the PC dogma, a mantra constantly being pounded into our heads. Repeat after me: Diversity is a strength. Diversity is a strength. Diversity is a strength. It's like the shrieking radios permanently attached to bright people's ears in the Kurt Vonnegut story "Harrison Bergeron", to prevent them from using their superior intelligence. Contrary to everything you've heard, never in recorded history has diversity been anything but a disaster.

Look at Ireland with its Protestant and Catholic populations, Canada with its French and English populations, Israel with its Jewish and Palestinian populations. Or consider the warring factions in India, Sri Lanka, China, Iraq, Czechoslovakia (until it happily split up), the Balkans and Chechnya. Also review the festering hotbeds of tribal warfare -- I mean the "beautiful mosaic" -- in Third World disasters like Afghanistan, Rwanda, and South Central LA. If diversity is their strength, I'd hate to see what their weakness is. The fact that we have to be incessantly told how wonderful diversity is only proves that it's not....

In response to the wanton slaughter of thirteen American troops at Fort Hood by a disgruntled second-generation Muslim immigrant, Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, Army Chief of Staff General George Case went on Meet the Press and said, "Our diversity, not only in our army but in our country, is a strength." Then a few years later, after two Chechen immigrants bombed the Boston Marathon, former CIA director Michael Hayden told a Fox News Sunday panel, "We welcome these kinds of folks coming to the United States." Really? The kind that launch murderous attacks on Americans? Do people even listen to themselves when they spout these bromides, or is it just background music? Saying he was speaking "as the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency," Hayden added, "Immigration to this country contributes to our national security." The 9/11 attackes must have been fantastic for national security!

Hayden also made the strange announcement that America is "required to look like the world." Is that in the CIA charter? I know it's in the Democratic Party's platform and also in the wedding vows of John Kerry and Teresa Heinz. This wasn't some nut from the ACLU. It was a former government official -- the head of the CIA. At least it becomes less of a mystery why no one at the CIA saw 9/11 coming.

A few days later on MSNBC, Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California responded to Muslim immigrants' bombing the Boston Marathon by saying, "The American-Muslim community is a source of great strength to us...our strength in America has always been our diversity." Do these people have a silicone chip in their brains that makes them say that? How about a rousing chorus of: "Four legs good, two legs bad!" This is the sort of brainwashing Americans are relentlessly subjected to, day after day, from every major news outlet. The good news is, even after years of wall-to-wall propaganda, Americans still aren't sold on the idea.

Thus endeth the excerpt. Buy or borrow Adios America!, and read the truth the government and the lamestream media won't trust us with.

"Kaffirs!" Muslim extremists ARE out to get you!

Those who know (or think they know) something of the history and culture of South Africa may think that "kaffir" was an Afrikaans derogatory term for blacks -- like the N-word in the USA. In fact, it's a much older Arabic word for a non-believer, someone who is not a follower of the Prophet Muhammad. That's what the Muslim terrorists call the rest of us.

The politically correct apologists for al-Shabaab, the armed Somali Islamic extremist group that attacked a shopping mall in Kenya, are up in arms [Bad rib! Ed.] over portrayals of the terrorists as, errr, Islamic extremists out to murder non-believers. Some lamestream pundits are saying that, oh noooo, they're just Somali patriots fighting against the evil Kenyans who've invaded their homeland.

Well, that's not what the Islamic extremists themselves are saying. In an e-mail exchange with Associated Press, reported today in HuffPost, a spokesthingy for al-Shabaab said that foreigners were a "legitimate target" and confirmed witness accounts that gunmen tried to let Muslims go free while killing or taking the others captive.

AP quotes the terrorists as saying "The Mujahideen carried out a meticulous vetting process at the mall and have taken every possible precaution to separate the Muslims from the kaffirs before carrying out their attack."

Eye-witnesses have said the gunmen rounded up people, asked questions about Islam that only a Muslim would know how to answer, and told the Muslims to leave the mall. Out of 72 dead counted so far, at least 18 were foreigners, including six Brits, and nationals of France, Canada, Trinidad, the Netherlands, Australia, Peru, India, Ghana, South Africa and China. The current death toll is 67 and is likely to climb with uncounted bodies remaining in the rubble of the Nairobi mall.

Walt's advice to fellow kaffirs: don't go to Kenya or Egypt or Syria or [Ed., please insert another dozen or so north African and Middle Eastern countries]. Stay somewhere safe, where there are no Muslim terrorists. Like, say, Boston. [Ed., maybe that wasn't a good choice. Please insert name of a country or city where there's no threat from the jihadists.]

No rivers of blood in streets of London... yet

Back in 1960, then-British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan made a speech to the Parliament of South Africa, which was quickly dubbed "the Wind of Change Speech". The theme was that independence was going to come to the British colonies in Africa and the rest of the world sooner rather than later. It was idle to stand up against the wind which was blowing, he told the recalcitrant (white) South Africans, so we might as well embrace the changes to our society which would surely follow.

As part of his government's "adjustment" to the new world of equality and diversity, the doors of Great Britain were opened wide to immigrants of any colour from any British colony. If you held a British passport -- to which people born in the colonies were entitled, at that time -- you were welcome to come and live in the mother country. And to no-one's surprise (except possibly Mr. Macmillan's), that's exactly what they did.

One of those who was not surprised was Enoch Powell, like Mr. Macmillan a Conservative Member of Parliament. After watching boatloads and planeloads of immigrants arrive from places like Jamaica, Pakistan and Nigeria, Mr. Powell made a dire prediction in what came to be called "the Rivers of Blood Speech". The gist of it was, as the name suggests, that unrestricted immigration from countries and cultures so foreign to that of Britain could only lead to social unrest and worse.

Mr. Powell said that Britain would rue the day when it opened the doors to 1000s of third-world immigrants who would not or could not be assimilated into British society. His speech included the line, "As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood.'" He did not actually use the phrase "rivers of blood", but the prediction was well enough understood.

This week Britons saw that, even taken literally, Mr. Powell was not far wrong.



The blood of a British soldier is not exactly "much", but there's certainly enough of it -- on the pavement, and on the hands, knife and meat cleaver wielded by his killers.

The two terrorists shot by police at the scene (in Woolwich, a part of London) were identified as "born in Britain, of Nigerian heritage". Like the Boston Marathon bombers, the murderers' families came to a new country, far from their impoverished homeland, and took advantage of the education and opportunities they were generously given by a guilt-ridden white Christian society.

Their response? To convert to "the religion of peace" (the PC term for Islam) and bite the hand that fed them. No, not "bite". More like "cut off", and worse. And yet politicians and "progressive thinkers" express surprise that such a thing could happen in a country which not only accepts but encourages multiculturalism and diversity. What they can't say is that they weren't warned!

Cynical about politics and terrorism? Me?

Yesterday, in "The friend of mine enemy is likewise mine enemy", I expressed shock -- shock, I tell you -- at the Canadian government's sudden discovery of an Islamic terrorist plot to blow up a VIA Rail train somewhere between Toronto and New York, and its sudden rush to push forward draconian anti-terrorism legislation that had been languishing on the order paper for a year.

Some have accused me of being cynical, for having suggested that it was more than a coincidence that this should have happened on the very day Canada's House of Commons was supposed to debate a motion which would have allowed MPs to speak more freely about the issues of the day.

OK, call me a cynic, but don't say I'm the only one who discerns a hidden agenda in the pronouncements and actions of "Call me Steve" Harper and his toady Toews. Check out  "Conservative anti-terror bill and arrests match up beautifully, don’t they", by Heather Mallick, in today's Toronto Star.

Ms Mallick calls the anti-terror bill shameful, and the arrests dubious. She states (as the fact is) that the tip from the alleged terrorists' imam, on which the Mounties acted, was a year old -- just like the legislation itself.

"How odd," she writes. "The week after the Boston bombings, the Conservative government had MPs suddenly debating an anti-terror bill that had long been hanging around with its hands in its pockets. The very same day, conveniently, the RCMP arrested two alleged terrorists."

Odd indeed. Enough to make even Walt cynical.

The connection between the Marathon Bombing, the Reichstag Fire... and this man

Reports today are that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, "Suspect No. 2" in the Boston Marathon bombing, may never be able to tell us why he did it, and who else was involved. He is in a Boston hospital in "serious condition" from wounds suffered when the Law opened fire on the pleasure boat in which he was hiding. He might die before being able to answer questions. Just like Lee Harvey Oswald.

Which brings me to the topic of the Reichstag Fire. For those who don't remember, the Reichstag was the name for the German parliament and the building which housed it. By early 1933, Adolf Hitler had risen to the position of Chancellor -- equivalent to prime minister -- of the German republic. But the ageing Paul von Hindenburg, the President, stood between Hitler and supreme power.

On 27 February 1933 the Reichstag suddenly and mysteriously caught fire. The police noticed a young man named Marinus van der Lubbe warming his hands at the scene. Herr van der Lubbe was, in today's PC phrase, "intellectually challenged". After a little "enhanced interrogation" by the Gestapo, he confessed to starting the fire. However he denied that he was part of any conspiracy.

Van der Lubbe's denial notwithstanding, Hitler claimed the event was part and proof of a Communist conspiracy, and ordered that all leaders of Germany's Communist party "be hanged that very night." President Hindenburg countermanded that order, but did agree that Hitler should take "dictatorial powers" immediately.

Less than a month later, the Reichstag (meeting in temporary quarters, presumably) passed the Enabling Bill, which banned the Communist and Social Democractic parties from contesting part in future election campaigns.

In April, Nazis were put in charge of all local government in the provinces. In May, trade unions were abolished, their funds taken and their leaders put in prison. In July, a law was passed making the Nazi Party the only legal political party in Germany.

Thus "Reichstag Fire" became a metaphor for an event staged to provoke or legitimize a seizure of power. Or more power.

Two-thirds of a century after the Reichstag Fire came the atrocity of 9/11. America abounds in conspiracy theories, one of the most enduring of which is the claim that 9/11 was staged (and then covered up) by Dubya's government to strengthen its grip on power and take away the freedoms of the American people.

Walt thinks that theory is bullshit. But... there can be no doubt that, in the aftermath of 9/11, the freedom of Americans (and Brits and Canadians and Aussies and so on) has been drastically curtailed. The USA now has the "protection" of the Department of Homeland Security, for instance.

How many terrorists have they caught? And how many harmless citizens have been investigated and/or detained and interrogated for no other reason than (again for instance) having an Arabic-sounding name?

And let's not forget the Transport Security Administration -- TSA -- the folks who like to look at your junk at the airport. How many people have been denied boarding an American aircraft because they "look like the kind of person who would do something like that"?

Speaking of which... Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution?

That's the one which supposedly guarantees Americans freedom from "unreasonable searches and seizures". Walt wonders how many residents of Watertown MA asked the cops who knocked on their doors to produce a warrant.

But that's the way it is, nowadays, in the Land of the Free and Home of the Fearful. Sure, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. But is it really necessary for our governments to make us prisoners in our own countries, just because of the cowardly acts of a couple of misfits who (for all we know) may indeed have been acting on their own?

Fourth Amendment Footnote: To see what happens to someone who stands on his rights, read the true story of Aaron Tobey, who wrote an abbreviated version of the Fourth Amendment on his body and stripped to his shorts at a Richmond VA airport security screening area.

What should be done with killers like the Tsarnaevs?

Tamerlan Tsarnaev is dead, killed in a shootout with Boston police about 36 hours ago. The elder of the two terrorist brothers was named for the infamous "Tamerlane", a vicious conqueror who razed ancient cities to the ground and put entire populations to the sword. Tamerlan is the one who said "I don't have a single American friend. I don't understand them."

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the younger brother of Tamerlan, was apparently wounded in Thursday night's gun battle. He was discovered yesterday evening, hiding in a boat in someone's driveway. He is now in custody in a Boston hospital, where he is said to be in serious condition.

"Why did they do it?" -- assuming that they did do it -- has already been asked by everyone from Walt to the Prez and back again. If Dzokhar lives -- well, who knows? --  he will doubtless be asked that very question. Do not expect a particularly rational answer. Rather we may hear something along the lines of "I was mad at the world, so I decided to kill some Americans".

It may be that the two brothers "suffered" from anomie or alienation or weltschmerz or all of the above. It may also be that they were agents of a foreign power -- Russia, for instance -- or a foreign "religion of peace". They certainly didn't try very hard to cover their tracks or escape. Perhaps they were looking forward to martyrdom for Islam, and the delights of the 72 virgins awaiting them in the Muslim heaven.

But let's go with the first possibility -- that they were acting on their own for no better reason than dissatisfaction with their lives in the country that welcomed them as refugees and gave them the opportunity to get an education and a better life than they could ever have had in Kyrgystan or Dagestan or anywhere else in the miserable part of the world from which they came.

What should be done with someone who would commit a cowardly, dastardly and ultimately meaningless act of that nature? How about strapping a pressure cooker filled with shrapnel to his back and then...

1000s of voices will be raised -- Walt can hear them already -- calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty, at least for acts of terrorism. But was the Boston Marathon bombing an act of terrorism? Or just plain, senseless murder? Assuming the brothers Tsarnaev were not directed or controlled by outside forces, how is their crime any different from that of, say, Adam Lanza?

So Walt asks again, what is to be done with murderers? The Church teaches that we must follow the Sixth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill. What remains, then, is to remove murderers -- including terrorists -- from our society, not so much as punishment as for our protection and the (possible) deterrent effect on other killer wannabes.

Back in the 18th and 19th centuries, the British used to transport their worst offenders to Australia. The French gave their a one-way ticket to Devil's Island. Such places seemed so remote, in those days, that there was no way criminals could ever return to "civilization".

Do similar places of exile still exist? Well, Alaska has a lot of cold, empty space. And there are several flyspecks in the Pacific still under the flag of the USA. How about a nice trip to the South Seas for Mr. Tsarnaev? Maybe he wouldn't find 72 virgins there, but America would be rid of him.

Footnote: Walt hasn't forgotten about due process. Put Tsarnaev on trial before putting him on a slow boat to Guam.

Food for thought: Last week's Economist had an article, "Not dead yet", pointing out that the USA executed 43 criminals in 2012, less than half the number killed in 1999, when capital punishment peaked in America. Luckily for Adam Lanza, last April Connecticut became the 17th state to abolish the deah penalty.

More food for thought: Should America (and Britain and Canada) really be opening the doors to "refugees" from places like Chechnya, a part of the Middle East that has spawned decades of violence -- from separatist wars to suicide attacks, blood feuds and hostage sieges. See "How did Chechnya's culture of terror come to Boston?"

Don't call in an air strike just yet!

Events are moving so quickly in Boston that Walt has to get up earlier than usual to learn the latest. Could the FBI not manage to make arrests during the daylight hours so we could turn off the TV and get an uninterrupted 8 hours zzzzz?

OK, seriously, the breaking news is that the FBI, police et al. have shot one of two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings -- "the one in the black hat" -- and are closing in on the other. These are (or were) the two backpack-toting men whose pictures were released yesterday afternoon.

It is not clear whether anyone has asked either of them any questions, but asking before shooting wouldn't be the American way, would it. Besides, as one blogger wrote yesterday, they look like the kind of people who would do that kind of thing!

And what kind of people would they be? Chechens, that's what kind. So that explains it. Oh, you don't know about Chechens? When they're at home, they occupy a tiny republic on the north border of Georgia. [The other Georgia -- the one in Asia. Ed.] The language they speak is Chechen [Well, DUH! Ed.]  And the religion of most Chechens is... wait for it... Islam.

Just as we assume (but will never know for sure) that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone when he shot JFK, let's assume (but will never know for sure) that these two Chechens were foreigners living in the USA and acted in concert to perpetrate the outrage at Boston. And let's assume they are (or were) Muslims. Why did they do it?!

The new leader of the Canada's Liberal Party, Justin Trudeau -- son of Himself -- may have read Walt's post of Tuesday, for he dared yesterday to express the view that there are lots of people, including native-born Americans, who have a bone to pick with the supremacist policies of the US government. He argued that the motives of the bombers needed to be understood and considered, for until their grievances -- real or imagined -- are addressed, America and Americans will continue to be the target of terrorists both overseas and right around home. (That's Walt's paraphrase, not M. Trudeau's actual words.)

Canada's Bully-in-Chief, Stephen Harper, begged to differ. [Oh c'mon. Harper would never beg! Ed.] Apparently Mr. Harpoon belongs to the George W. Bush school of (semi)thought. It doesn't matter who they are or why they did it, he said. Stand up for America, hit them hard and make them pay!

We should be thankful that Steve only heads the government of Canada, rather than a truly powerful nation, otherwise the B52s would likely be en route to Chechnya even as we speak. Walt trusts that Barack Hussein Obama will show a little more restraint. Perhaps he might even read Walt's analysis and have a little think about the unintended consequences of his dubious foreign policy.

Walt's solution to the threat of terrorism

Walt would like to see the latest annual report of the Department of Homeland Security. (It may be available online somewhere, but Ed. is too lazy to look. Or maybe not. Maybe it's "classified", or even "top secret".) Walt would like to know how many terrorists -- imported or domestic -- they've apprehended in the last year. Walt would like to know how they spend billions of taxpayers' dollars and yet are unable to prevent incidents like the Boston Marathon bombings.

Here is my offer to the Department. For just a small fraction of one year's allocation -- let's say 10% -- I will show you how to drastically reduce the likelihood of further attacks on America and Americans.

Later...
Ed. tells me I should present my plan for free, for the common good, and trust the Prez to compensate me once the benefit of my foolproof strategy is realized. OK then...

What America should do, to get the Islamic extremists off our backs, is leave them alone.

Follow Ron Paul's advice* and put an end to our foreign adventurism and entanglements. Bring the troops home. All of them. Let the USA get out of the Middle East and the ROTW entirely. Let the Shites and Sunnies and Wasabis fight each other, if they get off on that kind of thing, and good luck to them.

Do I hear objections? Yes, you wrapped in the Stars and Stripes... "Americans can't run from a fight!" I hear you bray. My dear patriot, Walt is not talking about running from a fight. Walt is talking about running to a fight!

If America is attacked, certainly she must defend herself. But there has been no attack on the landmass of the USA in nearly 200 years. [Don't mention the War of 1812! Ed.] It's the bellicose United States that keeps invading such threats -- to "world peace", not America directly -- as Grenada, Cuba, Mexico, the Philippines, Libya [That's enough. We get it. Ed.]

Another cavil? "What about the security of our [sic] oil supply?", asks the gentleman from Texas. "What if there isn't enough gas for my Hummer?"

Dear guzzler, do you really believe that Iran or Iraq or Libya, if left to themselves, would refuse to sell any more oil to their biggest customer? And even if they did, there are other sources. Canada, for instance, has all kinds of oil it would be happy to ship south if the econazis would cease their sky-is-falling squawking about the Keystone pipeline. Getting oil is never going to be a problem for the USA. (Lifetime pct .980.)

So there you have it, gentle readers. Leave them alone and they'll stay home. And Americans can stop living in fear. You're welcome.

* Recommended reading: "Ron Paul to John Kerry: Foreign Interventionism Bankrupts America and Turns the World Against Us".